Criminal negligence is the only cause of the miserable condition of
our cattle. Our pinjrapols, though they
are an answer to our instinct for mercy, are a clumsy demonstration
of its execution. Instead of being model dairy farms and great
profitable national institutions, they are merely depots for
receiving decrepit cattle. Whilst professing the religion of cow
protection, we have enslaved the cow and her progeny, and have
become slaves ourselves.

Young India,
6-10-1921

An ideal goshala would supply the city of its
domicile with cheap and wholesome milk from cattle of its own
keeping, and cheap and lasting foot-wear not out of slaughtered hide
but of the hide of dead cattle. Such a goshala will not be on
one or two acres of ground in the heart of a city or in its
immediate neighbourhood but it would have at some distance, but
within easy reach, fifty to a hundred acres of ground where a modern
dairy and a modern tannery would be conducted on strictly business
but national lines. Thus there would be no profits and no dividends
to be paid and there would be also no loss incurred. In the long run
such institutions dotted all over India would be a triumph of
Hinduism and , would be proof of Hindu earnestness about cow, that
is, cattle protection and it would provide decent employment for
thousands of men including educated men; for both dairy and tannery
work requires expert scientific knowledge. Not Denmark but India
should be a model State for the finest dairy experiments, and India
should not to her shame have to export nine crore rupees worth of
dead cattle hide annually and for her consumption use slaughtered
cattle hide. If such a state of things is a shame for India it is a
greater shame for Hindus. I wish that all the Goshala
Committees will take to heart the remarks I made in reply to the
Giridih address and make their goshalas into ideal dairies
and tanneries and a refuge for all worn out and maimed cattle.

Young India,
22-10-1925

Every goshala or pinjrapol should have a tannery
adequate to its needs attached to it. In other words, the manager in
charge of every such institution should have a thorough knowledge of
the immediate steps necessary for utilizing the remains of dead
cattle. If this is done, the question, viz. how many heads of cattle
should a particular goshala contain, would not arise at all.

I do not know what the rate of mortality of cattle in
goshalas
is nor is it relevant to my proposition. So long as there is a
single head of cattle in a goshala its manager ought to know
how to dispose of its remains after it is dead, just as he is
expected to know how to look after it while it is alive.

Such humanitarian institutions for the protection of cattle as I
have described should normally take charge of the remains of the
cattle that might die in the village. Therein lies the interest of
the cattle, the depressed classes and the general public alike. In
villages where there are no goshalas or the
concomitant tanneries, some local person who believes in cow
protection should take it upon himself to get the carcasses removed
to the nearest tannery or get the preliminary processes performed
upon it and send the useful parts there.

The establishment of such tanneries as I have described does not
require much capital outlay. Only some initial expenditure would be
needed to train up workers for this work.